I have been reading the DCC RPG book for months now and really wanted to play. I finally got my chance to play 2 DCC adventures at Tacticon with Harley Stroh running them. Had a blast! Some of the most memorable gaming I have had since I started playing D&D in 1983!

I will be starting my DCC home campaign next year, but there is one thing I have noticed. In the fantasy genre where D&D and Pathfinder have a major foothold, there is one gaping hole that I think DCC can fill...a great STARTER SET!!!

I know DCC just had their second printing, but I do not want this game to die out! DCC, the way it is right now, is very intimidating by the size of the book alone. As an experienced gamer it's not hard at all and a BIG book means lots of interesting information. However, flashing back to when I picked up the red box D&D set in elementary school, it had everything I needed for levels 1-3 in a box with SMALL books and dice. If I had seen the current DCC book on the shelf I would probably not be gaming today.

Again, a STARTER SET with small books and zocchi dice covering levels 0-2 would go a long way to bringing the joy of fantasy RPG gaming to a whole new generation!

a STARTER SET with small books and zocchi dice covering levels 0-2 would go a long way to bringing the joy of fantasy RPG gaming to a whole new generation!

This gets brought up from time to time. I'm a champion of this idea and hope that someday Joseph decides to go in this direction. At the moment, however, he's more interested in leaving the rules alone so that he can focus on module creation.

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own." -- Gary Gygax"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" -- Dave Arneson

I think it is the intimidation factor of a large book that might scare some new players. Really, the game isn't that rules heavy and it is all the art work and tables for each spell that really consume the space. Rules content is pretty light. It sometimes just takes a single advocate of the game to convey that to someone. Once they open the book, see all the artwork and all the tables (tables that generally aren't needed unless you have the spell) then they realize that it isn't that intimidating.

I've actually had a blog article bouncing around in the back of my mind about how DCC RPG could make a great starter RPG for people. I think the funnel is a great way to ease people into the game, then add on complexity when the characters level up.

Maybe something like a quickstart guide available as a free PDF would be enough? Something for the curious to download and take that baby step in? Of course that doesn't solve the dice thing.

I'm on the other side of the fence (which may sound odd for a primary teacher who has introduced many kids to rpgs). To me, unless you plan to continue to produce more boxed sets that expand the game for folks buying the "BASIC set" (so you later release EXPERT, COMPANION, etc.), all you're doing is essentially selling them a crippleware version of the core rules. I have always hated the, "Spend money on this taster! Now, go spend more on buying the content you already have again!" approach. I'd favour a boxed set that instead split the rules into a few smaller, softcover volumes (with thinner stock) and incorporated dice, but included the full rules. Let's be honest, the rules are pretty simple, but a decent stock combined with many tables, and a LOT of artwork, makes DCC seem more intimidating and complex than it really is. It'd be easy enough to reduce page count and make it seem more approachable without removing content.

As a player, supporter, and huge fan of DCC RPG -- and as a middle school teacher who is running an afterschool RPG club for 12 and 13-year-olds that is in it's fifth year -- I can say with 100% certainty that a starter box aimed at entry level, younger role players would hit the mark.

I've tried Labyrinth Lord and the new Pathfinder Starter box. Both have their merits.

With DCC the old school art is approachable and not overly slick. The rules lite system is accessible and doesn't require as much text. The dark, weird, and violent Appendix N style of storytelling is a unique, compelling voice. And the "okay to wing it" gonzo style of play if forgiving, creative, and right where their imaginations are at. Kids worry if they are "doing it right." I ask them, did you have fun? Then you're doing it right.

The DCCRPG rulebook clearly isn't designed for indoctorination. More content = greater value. I get it. But who wouldn't love to see their son, nephew, or other young person opening up the DCCRPG equivalent of the Red Box beneath a Christmas tree this year? I know that I totally would.

Yes, Goodman Games makes the best adventures out there for those of us with a particular taste.

But do they want to grow the market by appealing to a new generation? I'm guessing not, but one can always hope.

Colin, that's great that you have taught RPG games to many kids, but what about those kids who don't have someone like you and have to be self taught?

Also, I don't really agree with the boxed set concept you mentioned. In my case, my friends and I played the red box basic set for many many months. We did not go to the next box set because we found AD&D! We had seen it on the shelves before but it seemed overwhelming in size and complexity, kind of like DCC. However, the additional information and concepts that were introduced in AD&D were now less foreign and even exciting to learn because of the red box.

D&D and Pathfinder have both released current starter sets, but they were terrible in my opinion. They missed the magic formula of the red box. Teach the person reading how to play through an interactive story that teaches game mechanics, move on to complete solo play and finally getting that person to reach out to his friends to teach them and play a group game. From there it is gaming on the bus, during recess, after school, on weekends and even gaming marathons during sleep overs!

Once my daughter gets older, I plan on giving her a red box just to see what her imagination does with it. I would rather it be a DCC starter set myself...hint, hint to Goodman Games!

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own." -- Gary Gygax"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" -- Dave Arneson

Kind of funny in that he originally wanted to produce this game in two books, one for levels 1-5 and one for 6-10.

Technically, Joseph only wanted one book that went levels 1-5.

There was no 6-10 until demand on the boards caused him to reconsider his position. I wonder after all if Joseph was right in the first place. A 1-5 book would have been somewhat thinner.

Actually, bholmes4 is right -- it was just 1-5 as the 'first phase', with a 6-10 to follow. That 6-10 books was said to be about having keeps and land and such, and sounded like it would've been a different game, of sorts...

At this point, I tend to think the fan pressure to have more than 5 levels would've been different, had it been clear(er?) that the power curve was different than 'previous editions' and 5th level would scale with around 10th level in older games.

Though I still think base-5 leveling is extraneous, and 7 levels would've been ideal (with 8-10 being the 'keeps' supplement).

I'm on the other side of the fence (which may sound odd for a primary teacher who has introduced many kids to rpgs). To me, unless you plan to continue to produce more boxed sets that expand the game for folks buying the "BASIC set" (so you later release EXPERT, COMPANION, etc.), all you're doing is essentially selling them a crippleware version of the core rules. I have always hated the, "Spend money on this taster! Now, go spend more on buying the content you already have again!" approach. I'd favour a boxed set that instead split the rules into a few smaller, softcover volumes (with thinner stock) and incorporated dice, but included the full rules. Let's be honest, the rules are pretty simple, but a decent stock combined with many tables, and a LOT of artwork, makes DCC seem more intimidating and complex than it really is. It'd be easy enough to reduce page count and make it seem more approachable without removing content.

The obvious rejoiner to this, especially if one is going to make the biggest impact with adventures, is to include a free starter pdf on the web, with a single free 0-lvl funnel and a single free 1st level adventure.

A starter should cover only lvls 0-2, and have a cut down version of even the 1st level spells (say half the spells in the actual book). No monsters, no judge's rules. Just levels 0-2, a few lvl 1 spells, the basics of fighting and casting, and here are some adventures to run. Want more? The actual book is very, very cheap considering modern standards per volume. A steal, really. And look! We have quite a few more modules to sell you......

A starter should cover only lvls 0-2, and have a cut down version of even the 1st level spells (say half the spells in the actual book). No monsters, no judge's rules. Just levels 0-2, a few lvl 1 spells, the basics of fighting and casting, and here are some adventures to run.

Yeah, throw in a full set of dice (including Zocchi) and this would be quite cool. It could even include a player handout for rapidly generating zeroth-lvl PCs...

A starter should cover only lvls 0-2, and have a cut down version of even the 1st level spells (say half the spells in the actual book). No monsters, no judge's rules. Just levels 0-2, a few lvl 1 spells, the basics of fighting and casting, and here are some adventures to run.

Yeah, throw in a full set of dice (including Zocchi) and this would be quite cool. It could even include a player handout for rapidly generating zeroth-lvl PCs...

Hard to throw in dice with a free pdf. The idea was to limit the cost to Goodman Games while making a trial set possible.

The thing is, many folks who started with basic D&D stayed with Basic D&D, hence it becoming very successful as its own line as BECMI (and even before that, B/X). The gradual process of tiered, expanding boxed sets demonstrably works; more recently, Green Ronin has done very well indeed with its Dragon Age sets and these follow the exact same model. Can we really same the same for all the “taster” sets that have been released for D&D since?

Note, I didn’t say “No.” in the absolute sense to a boxed set (quite the opposite) but I did say the idea of a stripped down “taster” set wasn’t not a good idea unless you went the BECMI route (bitesize portions, gradually expanding the game, the rules rewritten specifically for the younger audience).

The problem is, unless introduced by an existing players, RPGs are dependent on being *read* and the number of folks prepared to read and learn such a game is limited. Making a game smaller helps, but at the same time how many youngsters would read such a slimmed-down set and then suddenly be okay with reading the meaty tome that DCC is a few months later? I’d say “Not many.” Bear in mind the serious competition rpgs have now that they never used to in the entertainment and games markets.

I’d also ask folks (especially the other parents here) to really look at the DCC RPG and ask themselves this question: is it (and its modules, including all art) really a game you’d give to, say, a 10 year old (the age I learned, on my own, with Mentzer Basic D&D)? I love the game, but I’d argue it’s an adult game with adult themes that isn’t necessarily appropriate for younger folks (and I'm a Brit, so adulthood is at 16, btw). And if you argue that a DCC Basic set would be for folks “13+” or something like that, you’ve just shot yourself in the foot with a hellishly narrow age range, because by the time they’re 15-16, if they’re the sort of kid who’d happily read and play a tabletop rpg, they’d be able to read the core rules anyway. Also, don't forget, producing such a work has to be cost-effective and not just the result of rose-tinted wishful thinking. Better to write a game specifically for youngsters if you’re trying to introduce them to gaming, though that is also a road paved with, if not outright failure, then a lot of success that didn’t grow the market the way some daydreamers assume it will. Heck, I was even involved with one such rpg (Faery’s Tale Deluxe) that was nominated for three ENnies and an Origins award! Didn’t make much of a splash.

The idea that a boxed set not produced by WotC or Paizo can somehow “grow the market” to any appreciable degree is, sadly, a pipe dream, especially as fewer folks read, those who do read less (or only online), bookshops are folding, more shopping is online, and folks interested in fantasy/sci-fi games can get a quicker, more attractive fix with a console. Hell people, they don’t even read the short instruction manuals any more, which is why games often include as-you-play tutorials. Going the electronic route idea has more potential, but only if it was fully-interactive in a way no traditional rpg pdf has been to date; a LOT of younger folks already live their lives attached by umbilicals to their hi-tech mobiles or pads, and numbers are increasing.

If folks want to grow the traditional market, they need to get out from behind the computer screen and start local clubs, recruit more non-gamers, and teach their own sons and daughters (and their friends). Anything else is simply wasted hot air.

Once upon a time I'd have been one of the folks calling for a starter boxed set. These days, after freelancing, after studying publishing and marketing (BA with Hons), after self-publishing, and now being well into my second decade of teaching, I think it'd be a great way to throw money away unless you're in an enviable position already, and maybe even then.

I’d also ask folks (especially the other parents here) to really look at the DCC RPG and ask themselves this question: is it (and its modules, including all art) really a game you’d give to, say, a 10 year old (the age I learned, on my own, with Mentzer Basic D&D)? I love the game, but I’d argue it’s an adult game with adult themes that isn’t necessarily appropriate for younger folks (and I'm a Brit, so adulthood is at 16, btw).

As a parent I would play the game with my kids, but mainly because I can act as the "filter". I do that with some of the Pathfinder mods I run for my kids as well. Tweak little bits here and there that might be just a little over the top. I do get what you are saying though. I think I'd let my son read the DCC RPG rulebook (he's 8, but a bit mature for his age). He's devoured the Pathfinder Beginner Box to the degree I think he knows the rules better than me.

Colin wrote:

If folks want to grow the traditional market, they need to get out from behind the computer screen and start local clubs, recruit more non-gamers, and teach their own sons and daughters (and their friends). Anything else is simply wasted hot air.

This. This is the best way to grow the hobby. While I enjoy intro sets (I am a big fan of the Pathfinder Beginner Box as it was something my kid could devour on his own once I lit the spark), the best way to bring people to the hobby is to advocate it yourself. Run some games, intro people to the game and make it accessible.

I would say instead of a starter box set they should make a sandbox setting. You could throw in the quick start rules (already available as a free pdf or, at least it was) to get up some 0 level pcs, plus rules for the first levels 1-3 (Does not need to have every spell for those levels, and would need a lot fewer crit charts, etc).

But that would be a bit of a free be for people who are thinking about getting into the game. You could make the rest of the box set relevant by including a sand box setting with adventure sites and ideas, as well as a level 0 adventure to kick things off. There could also be a book detailing unique monsters of the region. Sort of a mini-monster manual with all new wired creatures specific to the setting that could be used to create your own adventures, as well use in other settings. So thats a quick start rule book (levels 0-3 and basic rules), a monster book, a new 0 level adventure book, and a book talking about the setting, important locations, and ideas for adventures. Further adventure moduals could be released that are set in the locations mentioned int he sand box setting.

Finally, throw in some of the special dice and quick reference sheets for the crits and fumbles, and a pad of character sheets.

This way, if you are veteran of the game, you would still want this set for the new adventure, monsters, and area setting (again, a small sandbox area that could be dropped into what ever setting you are already using). If you are a new player, you would get all this plus some easy to manage quick start rules to get you into the game, and you will still get tons of use out of the materials in the set even after you buy the full rules. If it can retail for about 30-35 bucks it should do pretty well I would think (going over 35 bucks might work but it will have to be that much more of a sandbox product rather than a quick starter kit. For example, for 50-60 bucks, if I am going to bite, it needs to have small poster map of the area, and good page count on the setting book, monster book, etc.)

One of the biggest problems that Dungeons & Dragons (and by assosiation, other rpgs) faces is that it is viewed as such a shockingly awful geekish pastime by todays youngsters. I had a bit of an argument with my Godson who despite loving Skyrim, Fable etc (all completely derived from D&D's rich history) could not grasp the fact that he might really enjoy table top games because he likes such similar videogames and that his derision of D&D was unjustified. He could not get past the name Dungeons & Dragons and the connotations of being a social outcast for playing something so uncool. This coming from a kid who loved playing Warhammer at a local shop and having a father who has been an avid roleplayer all his life.

It's a tough challenge to get over preconceptions with children about these rpgs.

The Star Wars set looks like a good possibility to attract people to play because of the strong licence. Similarly Dragon Age was and is a good idea but I think Green Ronin are probably not big or rich enough to get that game out into enough hands and perhaps a new videogame IP isn't perfect. A Halo Rpg? Now that might stand a better chance.

(I think B/X was perfect for beginners. In terms of ease of starting new players and longevity of interest and play. I would like WOTC to reprint those box sets! I would buy those in a heartbeat. For nostalgic reasons but also because it was a great game and still is.)

As to DCC RPG as an entry game for young people. Hmmm. Maybe.

_________________Playing since about 1980Latest games: DCC RPG of course!Quote I like: "I am on a computer therfore I am" (Alan Plater)

The way I've mitigated the intimidation factor of the "big book" is to print out the 0-level character creation rules, and then the class write-ups. I have several copies of each, and that's essentially the "new user package." You get the 0-level character creation rules, and then we play. When you're ready to level up to a class, I hand out a copy of the individual class write-up.

For spells, I don't tell the players anything - they get to be surprised when they roll a Spell Check. I am playing with folks that have no interest in _running_ a game at the moment, but I think the more that's in the dark, the more exciting the game is for the players. They don't necessarily have to dig into the nuts and bolts. They just have to play their characters and explore the world.

Although the rules are solid gold, even I find the size of the book a little much. The only other RPG of that size I own is Blue Book Talislanta. Not sure I'm too keen on the BECMI mode. B (sans ECMI) wasn't really a starter, it was the start of the rules (with more following in subsequent box). I do think the game would greatly benefit from being broken up into 2 or 3 books (a la PH, DMG, MM). That way, you get more manageable thematic chunks.

I have established in the past I am a fair, honest DM, so they have no reason to doubt me.

Roll those dice in the open and it's all good.

Ya -- in my case, it's mostly because I have a bunch of lazy bahsterds for players. I'd love to spend a few months just _playing_ this game...

But, overall, same with my group -- we've all been playing together for between ten and thirty years. So, the rules hardly register with those guys anymore. My younger players are getting weaned off of 3.5, but other than that --

I can say, with regard to a Starter Set, I've run the game with a handful of folks that either never played an RPG before or had very limited experience -- and they had no issues picking up how to play. Granted they barely cracked 1st level (I think we had one session at 1st level), but I don't necessarily know if the game would benefit from a Starter Set. Maybe specific Quickstart rules -- that cover up to (and including) 1st level at a lower level of detail than the main game (maybe a collection of spells with limited spell results, etc).

What it _may_ need is a starter "mini-campaign" -- something like a Keep on the Borderlands or something -- an adventure that details, not just the dungeon, but a starting town and the general surrounding area -- and that includes some rules summaries at strategic points like KotB did. I would actually vote for this as the issue #100 adventure. Something that an adventuring party could spend their first three levels adventuring in or around and gives the DM a kind of "next steps" when the characters are ready to move on into the larger world.

My younger players are getting weaned off of 3.5, but other than that --

3e taught some players to ask the judge, "What does my character think?" with its Sense Motive checks etc.

DCC teaches the judge to reply, "How the hell should I know? That's up to you!"

EDIT: Earlier games would have taught the same thing, if they had taught players to ask the same question. IMHO, there is a big difference between "Does it look like it would hold my weight?" and "Do I think I should climb it?"!

3e taught some players to ask the judge, "What does my character think?" with its Sense Motive checks etc.

DCC teaches the judge to reply, "How the hell should I know? That's up to you!"

Yeah -- I think I mentioned that in another thread. The most common question I got with DCC (and AD&D before that, when I went back to it after 3.5) from my younger players was: Can I <insert some common task here>?

The second most common thing I have to combat is: "I <try to do something simple, like look through this trash for shiny things>" *roll* I hate that. Too much rolling.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 16 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum